Liverpool FC Forum

by **tubby** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:56 pm

Alonso14 wrote:He's worth quite alot since we got a long term contract in place, while the gunners chairmen said he rejected offers more than £50m for henry (could be lying), who had only a year left. We could probably get £50m+ over a few years. Still not Value for money, if we go on to win the prem (with a player like stevie anythings possible) in the next few years, the money we would of raised would probably surpass £50m.

And the feeling of having Gerrard 8 on the back of your Liverpool shirt, well that feelings priceless.

Indeed he is a pricless player but If i had to put a price on him though id say easily 55M.

by **48-1119859832** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:22 pm

stmichael wrote:Stevie Gerrard was valued at about £34 million last year when Chelsea put in a bid for him. IF we had let him go, we would have no doubt negotiated a higher price. He could well have gone for nearer £40+ million. That was after a pretty good season and a superb Champions League final.

This year he has had probably one of the best seasons so far and was decisive in the FA Cup final for all the world to see. He was voted the most valuable player last year and won player of the season. this year. They call Liverpool a one man team when he plays well, and the way he plays in tournaments, especially finals - England may well be called a one man team after this world cup!

The question is - how much do you reckon he's worth now?

He doesn't have a price, to bring someone like that from our own academy and mould and shape him into the world finest and most complete player....I'd say he was priceless.

by **MASTER** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 11:45 am

the problem with chelsea is that after they win the champions league.
Is the russian going to take off or is going to bankroll them until they break even.
because if he goes chelsea can not sustain that wage bill and will go straight in the toilet.
so unless he wants to break them completely , he will have to set up some kind of ten year plan to cut their losses.

but that will cost a lot of money as they are still haemorrhaging money which far outstrios their income.
Iheard their wage bill is 40% larger than man u but their income is 40% less than man u.

by **MASTER** » Wed Jun 07, 2006 12:47 pm

Lando good point
but they were not BAD signings, that was the summer after the world cup and we came second the previous season and he only brought those in to the club the was dozens of teams after those 3 players.
but they were the WRONG signings with a language barrier, the only thing he did wrong was make a big mistake.
if he had bought kewell a year earlier played baros more and bought a right winger LFC would have challenged for the title.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Thu Jun 08, 2006 1:54 am

0asis wrote:
Lando_Griffin wrote:
0asis wrote:
stmichael wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:totally misrepresentative, take into account inflation and TV money and it is a more accurate picture.

Leon, I know inflation is a big issue that has to be taken into account on this. I mean in our years, how much would King Kenny be worth in todays money when we only paid something like £600K for him in the mid 70's?

Just look at it this way. Inflation aside it only cost us the same amount of money to win 18 titles for their two, 5 European cups, none for them etc.

The counter-argument to that would be add inflation onto Shankley and Paisley's signings then we would of spent just as much, if not more than Chelsea.

....Over a 50 year period, compared with their 3 years.

You raise a good point.

by **PhiLFC** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:26 pm

Money we've spent with inflation calculated in (the second figure is at 2001 rates as I couldn't find a more up-to-date inflation calculator):

Shanks 1.26m = 7.8m
Paisley 5.43m = 13.9m
Fagan 2.57m = 4.9m
Kenny 12.53m = 17.8m
Souey 17.94m = 21.7m
Evans 43.1m = 47.8m
Houllier 125.4m = 131.7m
Benitez = 58.1

Added together this comes to over 300m - lets say 310m with the inflation between 2001 to 2005. Not bad when you consider how much silver is in our cabinet

by **PhiLFC** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:30 pm

stmichael wrote:
Espionage wrote:what about inflation? these stats are interesting but not very accurate.....

Adjusting for time and value of money, LFC have spent around £332.5m (today's value equivalent) in the last 47 years, which sort of proves the point that what's going on at Chelsea is vulger and a total distortion of the market.

It is funny but I get the feeling every big club is waiting for Chelsea to end their buying for the summer before they pursue their targets.

sorry - didn't see this post - figures are about the same though

Liverpool FC Forum

This puts everything into perspective - Unbelievable figures

Who is online